Background: Neuroendocrine tumors (NETs) that originate in the distal jejunum and ileum are commonly diagnosed in stage IV, with liver metastases in 50-75% of cases. The aim of this study was to ascertain the impact of surgery in a consecutive series of patients with small bowel NET and synchronous liver metastases treated at a single institute. Methods: Ninety-one patients managed between 1995 and 2011 were extracted from the institutional tumor registry. All patients had diagnosis by histology of small bowel NET and synchronous liver metastases. Results: Among the 91 patients 28 (30.8%) underwent primary tumor removal and liver metastases resection or intraoperative termal ablation (Group 1), 54 (59.3%) underwent resection of only the primary tumor (Group 2), and the remaining 9 (9.9%) did not receive any surgery (Group 3). After a median follow-up of 64 months an overall survival (OS) of 93.1%, 81.8% and 76.2% at 3, 5 and 8 years was registered for the whole group. Cancer-specific survival (CSS) was 93.1%, 83.3% and 77.6% at 3, 5 and 8 years, respectively. Five-years OS differed significantly according to the surgical approach (96.0% for Group 1 vs 79.8% for Group 2 vs 48.6% for Group 3, p=0.02). During the course of the illness octreotide was administered in 78 patients (85.7%), peptide receptor radiotherapy in 61 (67.0%), systemic chemotherapy in 21 (23.1%), hepatic artery embolization in 17 (18.7%), interferon in 11 (12.1%), molecular targeted agents in 2 (2.2%). For patients who underwent any surgery (Group 1 and Group 2) the multidisciplinary approach was associated with a better OS (85.7% vs 77.2% 5-years OS, p=0.04). In the multivariate analysis only age was associated with OS, HR: 1.05 (C. I.: 1.01-1.10). The results of CSS were comparable to those of OS. Conclusions: In this metastatic setting of small bowel NETs the 5 year OS was as high as 82% with a maximum benefit achievable for patients who had primary tumor resection and liver disease amenable to surgical or thermal ablation. However, the potential impact of age in prognosis should be carefully considered when choosing the treatment to be delivered in such patients.